[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150910083146.GG3260@x1>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 09:31:46 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, kernel@...inux.com,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
Ajit Pal Singh <ajitpal.singh@...com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt: power: st: Provide bindings for ST's OPPs
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 09-09-15, 17:57, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > I think it will work for qcom use cases.
>
> Thanks for the Rant Rob, it finally got me moving :)
>
> > We can collapse the
> > tables down to one node and have speed bin and version as the
> > opp-supported-hw property. The opp-microvolt-names property would
>
> I am probably going to remove opp-microvolt-names property as well, if
> we are going to use separate entries for all voltage ranges in OPP
> node. i.e. two voltage ranges, slow and fast, like this:
>
> regulator A regulator B
> opp-microvolt-slow = <tarA minA maxA>, <tarB minB maxB>;
> opp-microvolt-fast = <tarA minA maxA>, <tarB minB maxB>;
>
> > be where we put the different voltage bins. What about the other
> > properties like opp-microamp or opp-suspend? Will all of those
>
> Lets keep them as is for now, unless we have a real user.
>
> > also get *-names properties to index into them based on some
> > string? I don't actually need those for my devices, but I'm just
> > pointing it out in case someone else wants to compress tables but
> > they have different microamps or clock latencies, etc.
> >
> > Finally, does this mean we will get rid of operating-points-names?
>
> That's the next thing I wanted to ask from Rob. We are surely not
> going to use them and there are no users or kernel code to support
> them today. Can we get rid of them from the DT ?
I think you answered your own question.
No users == !ABI == Strip it out.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists